Anders Breivik’s Closing Statement, Final Day (June 22, 2012)

The terrorism trial of Norwegian revolutionary nationalist Anders Behring Breivik, 33, began in Oslo District Court in Norway on April 16, 2012, and concluded on June 22, 2012, a month earlier than planned.

Breivik was accused of “destabilizing or destroying basic functions of society” and “creating serious fear in the population” by bombing a key government building in Oslo and conducting a shooting spree on the island of Utøya at a gathering of the Workers’ Youth League (AUF, Arbeidernes ungdomsfylking), the youth auxiliary of Norway’s Left-wing, anti-white Labor Party. His July 22, 2011 crime, in which a total of 77 people died, has been described as the worst act of terrorism in Norway since World War II. Among Norwegians, the date “July 22” is like “September 11” in the US. Literally everyone knows what it means.

Breivik freely admitted committing the offenses, but denied culpability on the grounds that he was acting out of “necessity” (nødrett). The purpose of the trial was to determine whether he will be classified as a criminal or treated as mentally ill. A decision is expected on August 24, 2012. Either way, he will spend the rest of his life in detention.

On the final day of the trial the defendant read his closing statement to the court, a translation of which follows. Recording and broadcasting of both statements was prohibited, so reporters swiftly took manual notes. Parenthetical ellipses indicating missing material—( . . . )—are in the original transcript.

Hyperlinks and annotations within square brackets have been added by me to clarify remarks and supply background information. I have likewise added my own boldfaced subheadings to break up the text and serve as a rough guide to subject matter.

To my knowledge, Breivik’s courtroom statements have not been published by any major media outlet in any European language outside Norway.

I wish to thank a Norwegian reader for providing a transcript and suggesting this translation.

Anders Behring Breivik reentered the Oslo courtroom after the break.

Representatives of the Central Committee of the Worker’s Youth League (AUF), in attendance prior to the break, did not return to hear Breivik’s closing statement.

Some hostile observers who did return, by prearrangement rose and silently exited the courtroom as Breivik took the stand. They did not look in his direction.

“For a long time before beginning, Breivik studied his notes.”

Statement

Thank you.

I think we can all agree that on July 22 a barbaric action occurred. What happened on July 22 in the government quarter and on Utøya were barbaric acts.

And I remember that on July 21 I thought after several years of planning, “Tomorrow morning I will die.”

(“Breivik took a deep breath and leaned forward before continuing.”)

I came to within 200 meters of the government quarter. Then I remember I thought, “In two minutes I will die.”

And what am I going to die for? That’s what I’m going to talk about now.

There are still some things I did not say enough about, and that’s what I’ll take up now.

The Sanity Issue

I will start with the assessment of my sanity. As a starting point, every person under the law is presumed sane.

And of those who have evaluated me, a total of 37 highly qualified individuals, out of 37 people, 35 have not found any symptoms at all. And of the 37, two have found a multitude of symptoms.

So it’s pretty obvious what one should emphasize. The 35 people or the two people. It’s clear the prosecutors do not want to repeat here in court what I said in the interrogations. I will not go into that now.

The prosecutor said I wanted to claim mental incapacity in the beginning. That is not true.

In December or late November, when the firsaA [psychiatric] report came [concluding that Breivik was a paranoid schizophrenic], everyone was shocked.

I was thinking: What to do next? I thought I would wait for the debate to die down. And I thought hard about strategy before demanding two new experts.

Also, gradually I thought: Now that I have been betrayed by two psychiatrists who do not have access to the conversations, how will I ever trust a psychiatrist again? That’s why I was considering not allowing myself to be examined again. If I get two reports against me, it’s over ( . . . )

Democracy No Longer Functioning

As I’ve explained, especially on April 17 [the opening statement], the European democratic political model is not working. The arguments I presented emphasize the need for a fundamental change of leadership in Norway and Europe.

This began with World War II. In the 1960s the Labor Party decided that a large group of Pakistanis who had been refused entry into Finland, and who came to Norway on a tourist visa, should be granted residence.

And that was how the multicultural experiment in Norway began. The Labor Party decided that Norway should follow Great Britain’s example, with Asian and African mass immigration.

I have already talked a lot about the ridicule of cultural conservatives. So I will not talk much about it, except to address some high points.

The main characteristic has been political discrimination. Cultural conservative NGOs [non-governmental organizations] and youth organizations receive no funding. They are opposed. Perhaps the only cultural conservative newspaper we had in Norway, Norway TODAY, lost press subsidies just a few years ago.

After July 22 subsidies to HRS [Human Rights Service], a cultural conservative organization, were halved. That’s an organization that has nothing to do with me.
During the past 20 or 30 years there has been public funding of extreme left organizations in Norway such as Blitz [an “antifa” communist, anarchist, and socialist youth movement permitted by the state to employ violence against the Progress Party, the Fatherland Party, the Democrats in Norway, and others] Serve the People [Serve the People—Communist League; Tjen Folket – Kommunistisk Forbund, a Maoist group] and the Norwegian Center Against Racism [Antirasistisk Senter, an anti-white NGO].

Ethnic Deconstruction

Perhaps some will remember the leader of Future In Our Hands [Fremtiden i våre hender], Steinar Lem [a Norwegian environmentalist], who died of cancer a few years ago. One of the last things he said was something that had burned within him, but he had not dared to articulate before he knew he was going to die.

It was that we fought for Tibetan rights and the Tibetan indigenous people, but in Norway it is not permitted to say that Norwegians have as much right to a homeland as the Tibetans, and that our rights are in fact equally important.

He did not dare to speak the truth before he was told by his doctor that he was going to die. Only then did he dare to say what he thought.

In part of the compendium, I’ve written a lot about [ethnic] deconstruction and the absence of morality in Norway since 1968. They are huge problems. In Norway today, ideals are upheld that are extremely harmful and will be detrimental to our future.

When it comes to sexually transmitted diseases and the sexual revolution, it’s actually something that is underreported, and has created major problems in Europe. [This is a subtle and astute observation. Sex, reproduction, and the family together constitute the taproot of race and genetics.–Trans.] The ideal being upheld is to have sex with as many strangers as possible. Instead of focusing on the nuclear family, the focus is on dissolving it, and all the problems which that entails.

For example, the Sex and the City ideal, where Samantha and Carrie through 100–200 episodes of the series have sex with hundreds of men. These are the ideals that are upheld today. This is a disease. It’s like sugar to the audience. These sick ideals should be censored and shielded from our community.

One of the most influential people in Norway, Arne Strand [a print and broadcast journalist and former member of Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland’s cabinet] in Dagsavisen [the daily newspaper Strand edits, until 1999 the official organ of the Labor Party, now independent] has issued many statements about press subsidies.

He proposes that everyone on the right, to the right of Carl I. Hagen [former Vice President of the Storting (Norwegian Parliament) and ex-chairman of the Progress Party], should be censored, and excluded from the democratic process. He says straight out that government press subsidies [to the Left, denied to the right] are necessary to preserve the current political hegemony.

We must protect hegemony, we must not allow people the right to express themselves. The system of press subsidies ensures that Norway will never be a democracy, because those on the far right are excluded.

I will mention some important political actions by the Labor Party, those in power in Norway, that legitimize and may trigger violent counter-reactions.

[Sverre Riisnæs served in Vidkun Quisling’s Nasjonal Samling (NS, National Unity) government during the German occupation; after the war he was imprisoned in a Norwegian psychiatric hospital from 1948–1960.]

But there were several.

(“Breivik sits leaning forward in his chair as he speaks. [Defense attorneys Geir] Lippestad and [Vibeke Hein] Bæra lean back and look down at the table.”)

It’s no secret that after the war many cultural conservatives and nationalists were neutralized with the help of psychiatry. Many members of the Nasjonal Samling were sent to the madhouse by Labor.

Halldis Neegaard Østbye, Quisling’s secretary and NS-ideologue, among other things wrote the book Jews’ War in 1943. She eventually died at Dikemark madhouse. Her and her husband’s ski factory was taken from them by the Labor Party at war’s end.

[Halldis Neegaard Østbye, active NS leader and prolific writer. In 1938 she wrote The Jewish Problem and Its Solution under the pseudonym “Irene Sword”; it was reissued in 1942 and 1943. She was working on a history of the Nasjonal Samling when the war ended. The first president of the Ladies’ Ski Club, she was important in the development of women’s sports in Norway.]

And Knut Hamsun we know about.

These unconstitutional, unjust, illegal sentences should be abolished, and compensation provided to the relatives.

Non-NS’ers who were opposed to the Labor Party were also tried and declared mad.

An example is editor Toralv Fanebust [a harsh critic of Norway’s post-WWII trials and persecutions]. When the attempt [to declare him insane] failed, he was given a lengthy prison sentence for having written about important Labor Party members’ actions before and after the war.

His grandson has recently released the book Krigshistorien: oppgjør med mytene [War History: Reckoning With the Myths] about how they tried to ( . . . )

Violence Against the Right

What else has the political power instigated and applauded that is likely to precipitate violent resistance?

The Fatherland Party [FLP, Fedrelandspartiet, a nationalist party in Norway between 1990 and 2008] received about 0.5 percent of the vote in 1993, the first time they ran in Parliamentary elections.

[FLP leader] Bjarne Dahl in 1993 tried to legitimize political opposition to immigration. At a market square meeting in Oslo, he had his face smashed with an iron pipe, his jaw broken, and his teeth knocked out in attacks by some Blitz members [antifas belonging to the state-funded group mentioned previously].

Party leader and professor Harald Trefall [1925–2008, experimental physicist, anti-immigration activist, and Fatherland Party founder] was also hit in the face by something that was thrown. The party chairman was bleeding from a wound in the face.

Also, others were beaten and kicked.

When a horrified spectator tipped off Dagbladet [one of the country’s largest newspapers] about these violent attacks, he received the following response from Dagbladet: “Isn’t that good, then?”

This was their attitude. The same attitude shared by most of the press. The mass media made no mention of the violent and dangerous attacks againt the Fatherland Party.

No Freedom of Association

On June 28, 2002, the parliamentary parties committed democratic suicide. They passed a new law saying that all parties that hadn’t received at least 5,000 votes in the last election were stricken [from the ballot].

They must collect 5,000 signatures under stringent restrictions. This means that there are very few small parties. It is almost impossible to start a new party in Norway today. In Sweden, the requirement is 1,500 signatures.

The PST [Police Security Service, Politiets sikkerhetstjeneste, internal secret police] boasts unrestrainedly about how they crushed Vigrid [link to its website]. The police called on all the young people in the organization and their parents. PST destroyed the organization through harassment of its young members.

[I urge readers to examine Wikipedia‘s heavily-slanted write-up of Vigrid to grasp at least dimly the nature of the group Breivik is referring to. Vigrid was founded in 1998 by Tore Tvedt, whom Breivik called to testify at his trial. A Canadian news site approvingly described PST’s operation this way: “The agency launched a campaign to disrupt the group by sending agents to visit everyone involved except its top leaders. One day in 2004, agents from all 26 field offices paid personal visits to each of Vigrid’s members, many of whom were teenagers living with their parents. The investigators continued this tactic for several months, until about 60% of Vigrid quit the group voluntarily.” “Voluntarily”—I like that. Employ the same tactic against Jews and the Left. Would it be “voluntary” then? Also, anti-“conspiracy” theorists please take note. The world is what it is. –Trans.]

Vigrid logo

What they have done is systematically harass political activists.

In addition, PST ran a comprehensive harassment campaign against the leader of Vigrid, Tore Tvedt. Among other things, extensive surveillance, house raids, arrests, and making sure he was repeatedly thrown out of rented houses.

At a school debate on August 28 in connection with the parliamentary elections of 2009, the party leader [Øyvind Heian] of the Norwegian Patriots [NP, NorgesPatriotene, a defunct anti-immigration party] received cuts in his forehead causing severe bleeding [during an attack by a far left anti-white mob including SOS Racism], forcing him to leave the meeting. The meeting continued as if nothing had happened. Neither the school administration nor the police did anything at all about the attack on the party leader.

Before local government elections last year the Christian Unity Party [KSP, Kristent Samlingsparti] was attacked by a person belonging to SOS Racism; they are communists.

Such things of course anger everyone with nationalist attitudes in this country.

That a counter-reaction has not occurred before July 22 amazes everyone who follows national trends. The anti-democratic forces that govern our country are obviously expecting something. This can be seen from the adoption of new surveillance measures. They have been doing exercises on scenarios like what happened [on July 22].

Yet those who govern the country say they have done nothing that could give rise to such a reaction. It is quite possible that many people connected with the power structure actually believe this.

Which means dark prospects for our country.

Communism and the Ruling Class

It is well known and documented that the Labor Party before World War II received funding from the Soviet Union. However, it is wrong to say that Labor is a full-fledged communist party. They do not support a planned economy. Hence the expressions “cultural Marxists” or “semi-communists.”

It is known that many Labor Party leaders had close relations to the Soviet Union right up to 1993. The Prime Minister’s father, [former Norwegian Foreign Minister] Thorvald Stoltenberg, had, for example, a code name in the KGB. Even Jens Stoltenberg [leader of the Labor Party and current Prime Minister of Norway] had a code name, “Steklov,” in the KGB archives.

[According to Wikipedia, until 1990 now-Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg “had regular contacts with a Soviet diplomat who later was revealed to be a KGB agent. According to Stoltenberg he immediately broke off this relationship when he came to the knowledge that his contact was a KGB agent. Several sources have confirmed that Stoltenberg’s code name within the KGB was ‘Steklov,’ a name Jens Stoltenberg used as his online alias when playing computer games such as Age of Empires.”]

Of two books about this, one, The Eagle Has Landed [Ørnen har landet, 2003] by Reiulf Steen I do not think has been suppressed, but I believe there’s a new book by Christopher Andrew that has been halted.

The problem with Labor is not their communist past, but that they refuse to acknowledge it.

Deconstructing the Nordic Race and European Culture

Labor Party Secretary Raymond Johansen claims they are required by international agreements to admit immigrants—instead of confessing that they want to transform Norway ethnically and culturally.

Raymond Johansen is intelligent enough to know that Japan and South Korea have experienced the same pressure from the UN to accept immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. Japan and South Korea have learned to say no. They do not want the nation to be used as a dumping ground for the birth rate of the Second or Third World.

The political model in Japan and South Korea proves that countries that say no to mass immigration in the long run will be stronger than those open to mass immigration. ( . . . )

We will experience huge ethnic, cultural and religious conflicts. It is such conflicts that led to July 22.

This the Labor Party and Raymond Johansen know. If they had any integrity they would admit why they want mass immigration. In other words, they have exactly the same agenda as the social democrats in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, and Great Britain.

Labor wants to deconstruct Norwegian culture. They want to deconstruct the Nordic race and Norwegian and European culture.

Individuals who have manifested support for cultural conservative organizations have been systematically ridiculed, harassed and persecuted in Norway and Western Europe since World War II.

In Norway, several hundred people over the last ten years have lost their jobs and been branded as racists because they opposed immigration.

An example is Remi Huseby [the young spokesman for the Norwegian Defence League, a group affiliated with the English Defence League], who lost his job after being labeled an intolerant and vicious right-wing extremist on the ground that he was opposed to the Norwegian state ideology, multiculturalism.

As a result, his employer felt pressured to fire him. This is only one case that documents journalists and editors ridiculing and persecuting cultural conservatives from WWII to the present.

The worst thing is that this demonization is better than being ignored. Being ignored is the worst of all.

In hundreds of cases in Europe and Norway cultural conservatives, anticommunists, and nationalists have been driven to suicide by public labeling and demonization. It is the same as in the Soviet Union.

So, another point I thought of omitting: cultural self-loathing. Norwegian society is suffering from a cultural psychological disorder that manifests itself through self-contempt for Norwegian ideals. This collective cultural psychosis is caused by decades of cultural Marxism.

A good example is Norway’s contributions to the Eurovision Song Contest over the past four years.

We let a White Russian asylum seeker, probably with a Tartar background ( . . . ) It is indeed good that we very occasionally allow an asylum seeker to represent us. But what is going on?

A few years later we let Stella Mwangi [a black, Nairobi-born “Norwegian-Kenyan” singer] win with a bongo song. What is Norway doing, sending an asylum seeker as ambassador? Is it lack of Norwegians in Norway, or are they suffering from self-hatred?

Then we let an asylum seeker from Iran win. This is an insult to all Norwegians ( . . . )
The answer is simple. A great many Norwegians suffer from cultural delusions and have urgent need for “medication,” with immediate implementation of cultural protectionism and the Nordic ideal.

Regarding the definition of the term “indigenous people,” this means original or old residents. It does not mean ethnic Norwegians are not indigenous.

We know of course that the United Nations does not recognize ethnic Europeans as indigenous people. But we must observe the UN’s agenda, its creation when the Axis powers were defeated in WWII.

The UN supports the deconstruction of European states. So does the European Union [EU]. The UN does not support the idigenous European population because the UN is controlled by cultural Marxists—the same as the EU.

For example, [José Manuel Durão] Barroso, who has been the EU’s supreme leader for many years, was a longtime member of the Portuguese Communist Party. This shows the kind of people that hold power in the EU and the UN.

So, to come back to the definition of the word “indigenous.” There is no definition of “indigenous peoples” that nationalists and cultural Marxists can agree upon. Europe’s nationalists and cultural conservatives use a different definition than does the EU or the UN. The correct definition is “old or original people.”

Why should one support the struggle for indigenous people in Tibet, Bolivia, and other places but not in Europe? Why do indigenous activists in other parts of the world receive support and praise, while indigenous activists in Europe are branded as racists?

The battle is identical for all indigenous activists, namely, to fight against the ethnic and cultural extinction of their people from immigration. The fact that activists elsewhere are supported while we are combated as if we were a disease is an intolerable injustice.

When it comes to ongoing ethnic deconstruction I would recommend that everyone read the essay [he mentions its title, but the reporter omits it] by David Coppell and Johan ( . . . ) [Presumably this is a spelling error; I know of no David Copell he might be referring to. At any rate, he named the essay and its authors.]

Muslim Demographics

Regarding Mullah Krekar [a Kurdish Islamic refugee in Norway], the reason I wanted to call him as a witness was to shed light on orthodox Islam’s view of Europe. He calls himself a Kurdish religious leader. (. . . ) He is one of the few Muslim leaders who are honest about Islam’s takeover of Europe.

Krekar said, “In Denmark they printed drawings, but the result was that support of Islam increased. I, and all Muslims, are evidence. You have not managed to change us. It is we who are changing you. Look at the changes in the population of Europe, where Muslims reproduce like mosquitoes. Every Western woman in Europe has 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries gives birth to 3.5 children.”

[“All the sources are in the compendium,” Breivik says, looking at the judges.]

I also remind you that Muammar Gadaffi, who was recently killed by NATO, said in March 2007: “There are signs that Allah will grant us victory in Europe without use of the sword. We need no terrorists, we need no suicide bombers. The millions of Muslims in Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.”

I will mention a few points about demographics. Demographic examples documenting how Islamic demographic warfare works in practice.

Kosovo [in southeastern Europe, formerly part of Yugoslavia] is a very good example that I have not talked about. In 1900 Kosovo was 60% Christian, 40% Muslim. In 1913 the figure was 50% [Muslim], 1948 72%; in 1971 it was 79 percent Muslim. In 2008, after NATO had bombed our Serbian, Christian brothers, Kosovo was 93% Muslim. In just 100 years Kosovo has gone from being a Christian country to being a Muslim country.

Lebanon is an occupied state. In 1911 it was 21 percent Muslim. Today there are more—approximately 80 percent. This is demographic warfare. Warfare that is waged against Europe and against Norway at this moment.

And not only against against Christians, but against Hindus as well.

Pakistan [carved out of India as a Moslem state in 1947] was 25 percent Hindu in 1941; in 1948, 17 percent. Today, it is less than 1 percent. This is Pakistani “tolerance” for people who think differently.

Bangladesh [which declared independence from Pakistan in 1971] in 1941 was 30 per cent Hindu; today it is less than 8 percent.

Then one can look at the exploding populations in Muslim countries.

In 1951 there were 33 million people in Pakistan. Today they are nearly 200 million. From 33 million to nearly 200 million in 60 years. Officially, they report a birth rate of 3.58, but it is of course a lie.

The media like to convey the idea that most Muslims support democracy, but it is not true. A survey conducted by the University of Maryland, in which 4,000 Muslims were queried, shows that 65 percent want to unite all Muslim countries into a caliphate, and 65 percent wish to implement strict interpretation of Sharia law.

“Child Killer”

One last point. Lawyers previously called me a child murderer. But we know that the average age on the island was over 18.

Many armies in the world have 18-year-old soldiers. Many of our own soldiers in Afghanistan are 18. Does this mean that we send children to war?

The Labor Party and the AUF [Labor’s youth auxiliary] are themselves guilty of mass murder of children in hospitals across the country. Thousands of children are killed every year by abortion. Muslims do not practice abortion because Sharia does not permit it. Labor is thus a culprit in mass murder, and then uses the low birth rate as an excuse for mass immigration.

Resistance Increasing

If you choose to recognize my claim of necessity, you will effectively send shock waves through all the illegitimate regimes in Europe.

The court should remember that the biased judges who worked for Hitler’s Germany were condemned by history after the war. Likewise, history will judge the judges in this case. (“When Breivik said this, district court judges Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen and Arne Lyng looked directly at him.”) History will tell whether they convicted a man who tried to stop the evils of our time. History shows that sometimes one must implement a barbarity to stop an even greater barbarism.

My brothers in the Norwegian and European resistance movements are sitting out there watching this case as they plan new attacks. They might be responsible for as many as 40,000 deaths. Yesterday, explosives were found at a Swedish nuclear plant, suggesting that my brothers in the Swedish resistance had something to do with it.

(“Breivik says in court that some of ‘his brothers’ placed explosives in a truck outside the Swedish Ringhals power plant. It is clear that Breivik sees a lot of news on the cell.” Ringhals is Sweden’s largest nuclear facility, supplying 20% of the country’s electricity.)

In the compendium I describe how to attack Swedish, German ( . . . ) nuclear power plants. It is intended to break the back of ( . . . ) PST knows that militant nationalists have access to weapons that can cause ( . . . ) It is my duty to warn about this because it can be prevented if the will is there.

Create an Ethnostate

In the compendium I described a solution that can prevent all future conflicts with ultra-nationalists.

The smartest thing that could be done is to give us autonomy, autonomy within a specific area of Norway for people who oppose mass immigration and multiculturalism. We are interested in having our own state within the state, reserved for the indigenous Norwegian people. In other words, national conservatives, orthodox Christians, and National Socialists.

Such a solution would be good for both parties. Marxists and liberals would not have to experience our anger and complaining about the current state. And we would not have to live in a multi-ethnic hell. I have written about this political model and will convey the proposal later.

A solution like this can be used in all European countries, and can thus prevent further escalation of the conflict between cultural conservatives and multiculturalists.

The starting point might be that they get control over an area equivalent to about 1–2 percent of the country, and the area increases proportionally with growth. If we do not succeed and flourish, the autonomous state will not be developed. This political model is similar to political solutions relating to indigenous peoples in other parts of the world. Many ultra-nationalists and others would feel positive about developing such a solution.

Fair Warning

The alternative is that we focus on the takeover of the entire country of Norway—something Marxists and liberals would be mightily displeased with.

But the current regime is not interested in dialogue with us, so we have nothing to lose and the conflict will escalate over the next few years. It might not be tactful to say this in that the prosecutor is “gunning” on with “mental incapacity,” but I must convey my peace proposal, which could save many lives in the future.

(“Breivik raises his voice when he talks about what will happen in the future if his proposal for an autonomous area for nationalists is not followed.”)

This trial should be about finding the truth. The documentation of my claims—are they true? If they are true, how can what I did be illegal?

Norwegian academics and journalists work together and make use of ( . . . ) methods to deconstruct Norwegian identity, Christianity, and the Norwegian nation. How can it be illegal to engage in armed resistance against this?

The prosecution wondered who gave me a mandate to do what I did. Was it the KT [Knights Templar] network? I have answered this before, but will do so again. Universal human rights, international law, and the right to self-defense provided the mandate to carry out this self-defense.

Everything has been triggered by the actions of those who consciously and unconsciously are destroying our country. Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel even a trace of moral obligation are not going to sit by and watch as we are made into minorities in our own lands. We are going to fight.

The attacks on July 22 were preventive attacks in defense of my ethnic group, the Norwegian indigenous people. I therefore cannot acknowledge guilt. I acted from necessity (nødrett) on behalf of my people, my religion and my country.

I therefore demand that I be acquitted.

Related

Related

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)

Thanks for the YouTube link. I have not had a chance to look at it yet, but will do so. I doubt that I’ll be able to view the whole thing or write a review, but it sounds worthwhile.

Re Breivik’s statement, I worked from two separate transcripts by journalists, both of which leave a lot to be desired in terms of quality.

I felt the need to cross-check and merge them. VG’s transcription was the most thorough, though it contained mistakes and omissions. NRK’s was far more selective, but recorded some things VG’s did not. Sometimes one essentially corrected or clarified the other.

Actually they did broadcast some of the other people’s testimonies, but as you say not the testimonies from people that the defense had called, and only if the witnesses had approved that the testimony should be broadcasted. It was a long debate about whether they should or should not broadcast anything but finally they decided to permit at least parts of the trial to be televised.

E.g. you can see where Breivik are interrupting one of the psychiatrics here: http://www.vgtv.no/#!id=53801 and if you click on “Terrorangreppet 22.juli” under “Kategorier” to the left you will find a lot of the broadcasted material there.

I am in America and I fear that my country is already lost. Fight back to save your countries before it is too late. Before you suffer the same fate that we are enduring in the U.S. Do not allow your selfs to wind up like us. Multiculturalism is a failed experiment. We are paying the final cost of this experiment. Liberals will not give up and will go down with this ship. Heed my warning brothers and sisters. -A Brother Across the Pond

Since you obviously know Norwegian: have you seen the documentary (or rather seven documentaries on seven different topics) Hjernevask (“Brainwash”)? It is about the politically correct and unscientific (or rather anti-scientific) dogmas in gender studies, anthropology, crime studies, “equality”, etc. I don’t know if it is available with English subtitles, but you should take a look at it and maybe write something about it for C-C.

He is obviously both sane and intelligent. His points are valid. His cause is just. Genocide doesn’t have to be physically obvious or dramatically rapid — to be genocide. Norwegian policy is genocidal toward the Norwegians; the Norwegians are being genocided right now. So few men like Breivik in each White nation who care.

Hardly a verbal trick to point out a contradiction of modern society. The dirty verbal trick is actually calling 18 year olds children or adults as suits the need of those setting the frame, and that’s precisely what Breivik puts his finger on.

Has more to do with class. The 18 year old “children” he capped were what we call SWPLs. The 18 year olds who go to war for Israel via US armed forces mostly are not, being ordinary white dudes from middle states. It’s already a semantic slap-fight at this point, but perception is everything: the former were “children” because they were not professional soldiers like the latter.

The same double standard is brought to bear against men who sleep with 17 or 18 year olds, the same teenagers who, at least if they’re American and European, will have already achieved a level of sexual competence that would make those of older generations blanch. Suddenly the 18 year old is a “child” again if the aim is to chastise the sexually free white man.

That was a pretty good overview by Breivik if he had not become a terrorist and given his travels throughout Europe and connections he was able to forge among the different nationalist groups in Europe and relatively wealthy financial status he could have created a genuine pan-European nationalist movement that nationalists groups running on an anti-Muslim immigration platform were making gains across Europe even in countries that have little foreign immigration like Finland.

Curious why he didn’t use the obvious examples of former Eastern European Soviet countries like Poland or the Czech Rep rather than Asian countries that have large indigenous populations that will always have a surplus workforce for labour.

Who was the man that set himself on fire outside the Norwegian court room during the Breivik trial? Was he ever identified?

Tore Tvedt: Thanks for showing up and commenting. It was grimly enlightening to read about your, and Vigrid’s, treatment by the PST. You displayed courage in testifying at the trial. Fjordman begged off.

ErilaR Wiwila: Thank you for the original e-mails and the link. It was interesting to hear Breivik speaking.

Jaego Scorzne: Like Greg, I detect an evolution in Breivik’s thinking. At any rate, to characterize him in a simplistic, or perhaps I should say conventional, way on the Jewish question would be to overlook important nuances. Even in the Manifesto I believe he stated that 2/3 of Jews (or something like that) were anti-European.

In the opening statement readers should pay careful attention to the way he speaks about the Axis powers. There he states that WWII will no longer be accepted by WNs as some sort of valid excuse for whites’ genocide by the state today (he does not use the word genocide).

He repeats the same thing here.

In the closing statement he is extremely neutral in his allusions to Germany and the Nasjonal Samling. He states that the postwar psychiatric treatment of the collaborators was unjust, that they should be rehabilitated, and their family members receive compensation.

He explicitly includes “National Socialists” among the members of the proposed ethnostate. (He does not use the term “ethnostate,” but that’s what it is.)

Breivik also treated as illegitimate current state persecution of anti-Jewish nationalist groups and leaders, including Vigrid, and was not afraid to “link” his name to theirs in calling Mr. Tvedt and others to testify.

No philo-Semite of the Geert Wilders, Fjordman, or JT variety—men whose deepest concern is not the survival of whites, but the interests of Jews—would ever take such positions.

“Many armies in the world have 18-year-old soldiers. Many of our own soldiers in Afghanistan are 18. Does this mean that we send children to war?”

Check.

“The Labor Party and the AUF [Labor’s youth auxiliary] are themselves guilty of mass murder of children in hospitals across the country. Thousands of children are killed every year by abortion. Muslims do not practice abortion because Sharia does not permit it. Labor is thus a culprit in mass murder, and then uses the low birth rate as an excuse for mass immigration.”

Abortion is a demographic boon to whites in the US: a far higher percentage of black pregnancies end in abortion (more than one third) than white pregnancies, and surely some white women are aborting mixed-race babies.

Eh, really? I doubt so many are aborted that it lightens the load in a perceptible or systemic way. How many more are prevented by responsible white girls on birth control? Add that, if we could, to the numbers aborting conceived white children.

In my experience, white girls tend to keep mixed-race babies. This has been mentioned here before. It’s the perfect atonement for white guilt. Or they might somehow fear being perceived as “racist” for aborting it. The pathology runs deep here; the image of massa’s daughter playing with a slave girl as a kind of doll presents itself. All of these impulses may be at work in the mind of the average white girl big with bastardy. Sounds far-fetched, but is it really?

Just today, trying to read some Heartiste at Tim Horton’s, a fat gawky gay mulatto kid sat at the table next to mine with his buzzard-like, blue-eyed SWPL mommy. Couldn’t figure if she’d borne the abomination, adopted it or what.

By the way, I am against all abortion. I guess as a eugenicist you are not. Not only am I against abortion, or shall I say does my nature revolt at the idea, I don’t like glib talk of black women aborting incipient humans as a “boon”.

Anyhow this is about Europe. You know the muzzie girls aren’t going to the clinic as much as the white girls. Hell, white nations pioneered birth control legislation. Eugenicists had everyone afeared that population was out of control! soon there’d be too many dumb Irishmen!

Actually, it would be worse, because the way blacks breed, 40 years represents 3 generations. So not only have we been spared 1/3 of the black children conceived since 1970, we have been spared 100% of the children they would have conceived over the last 40 years as well.

It seems reasonable to believe that most children conceived in rape in the US are aborted, and given that around 100 white women per day are raped by blacks, I expect that a significant number of mixed race babies are aborted by white rape victims.

Furthermore, a lot of women have abortions if they fear that they cannot take proper care of a child. Given the (cough) “low investment parenting” typical of blacks, again, it seems reasonable to expect that many white women end up aborting mulatto babies. Although now they can at least hope that they can grow up to be President! Who knows what would have happened, though, if Obama’s mama had access to an abortion clinic.

Uh, for once I agree with Uh. This is gonna be a total mind bender for him since he thinks we are the same person… It is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

“In the 41 areas for which race was adequately reported, approximately 55% of women who obtained legal induced abortions were known to be white, 35% were black, and 7% were of other races; for 3% of the women, race was unknown. (Table 9). ” http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm/#tab9

Whites are still the majority of all abortions even if you factor out hispanics. That equates to millions of white babies being murdered since Roe V Wade. Who cares about blacks? They are 13% of the population and kill each other off anyway (aids, drive-by shootings, etc…) WE NEED TO FOCUS ON SAVING OUR OWN!

If 65% of the population has 55% of the abortions, that is under-representation. If 13% has 35% that is massive overrepresentation. Leaving abortion just the way it is will delay the demographic tipping point.

If we had no Roe v. Wade, there would be 50% more drive by shootings and other black pathologies. Actually more than 50% more.

Sure we need to focus on saving our own. Most trends are against us. So why not focus our energy on changing the trends that work against us, rather than the one demographic trend that I know of that actually favors us?

I don’t have much more to say about it, but one curious stat I remember from the days I spent caring to look was that in “reasons for abortion” surveys, very few women gave rape as a reason, some figures as low as 1% :

And yet much is made of “rape and incest” in the media. The belief, shall we say even the myth, of rape/incest pregnancy reaches everywhere — I remember the presidential debates of Bush & Kerry, the latter being challenged by a woman in the audience about being pro-choice, his whole defense was based on rape/incest pregnancy. “I couldn’t turn away a girl who was raped by her uncle!” or some such absurdity.

Number one reason, as you’ll see in every such survey, is financial and psychological (“not ready”).

I hate to be graphic, but I would merely guess that one reason for rape abortions being so few is that, as I’ve read here & there, men committing rape often go for the rear, or if not, ejaculate outside of the vagina. (Perhaps they read PUA blogs.) Another, of course, is that the semen can be expelled immediately after the event.

“Leaving abortion just the way it is will delay the demographic tipping point.”

So you’re assuming that hasn’t been reached, and surpassed. Ok. This is the sort of thing one ought to know. I thought we were living in a nation that recently trumpeted its greater non-white than white birthrate, or that’s receiving every latest hiving-off of Chinese, with a resident Mexican population over twenty-millions, etc.

I hope you won’t fall back on “whites are still the majority”, as though that matters confronting “minorities” of many millions reproducing more and faster than us.

You’re right, in a bare numerical way, that black abortion has “saved” us from so many more youff. On the other hand, more white lives have been prevented and aborted by pampered memsahibs than could ever be simply aborted — and that for nearly a century.

It’s funny, I’ve had rabid liberals come at me for being pro-life with something like: Oh, so you want more homeboys in the world? Of course not, but it isn’t about that.

Many here purport to be concerned with “tradition”, yet what is more antithetical to what our ancestors knew than grinding up growing life whilst in the womb and sucking it out through a tube into a red box labeled “BIOHAZARD”? Everyone loves to quote G.K. Chesterton about everything, but I ask, what would Chesterton think of this?

Rhetorical question, ’cause I have the answer:

“The proceeding these quack doctors [of birth control] recommend does not control any birth. It only makes sure that there shall never be any birth to control. It cannot for instance, determine sex, or even make any selection in the style of the pseudo-science of Eugenics. Normal people can only act so as to produce birth; and these people can only act so as to prevent birth. But these people know perfectly well as I do that the very word Birth-Prevention would strike a chill into the public, the instant it was blazoned on headlines, or proclaimed on platforms, or scattered in advertisements like any other quack medicine. They dare not call it by its name, because its name is very bad advertising. Therefore they use a conventional and unmeaning word, which may make the quack medicine sound more innocuous.

[…]

“But there is a third reason for my contempt, much deeper and therefore more difficult to express; in which is rooted all my reasons for being anything I am or attempt to be; and above all, for being a Distributist. Perhaps the nearest to a description of it is to say this: that my contempt boils over into bad behaviour when I hear the common suggestion that a birth is avoided because people want to be “free” to go to the cinema or buy a gramophone or a loud-speaker. What makes me want to walk over such people like doormats is that they use the word “free.” By every act of that sort they chain themselves to the most servile and mechanical system yet tolerated by men. The cinema is a machine for unrolling certain regular patterns called pictures; expressing the most vulgar millionaires’ notion of the taste of the most vulgar millions. The gramophone is a machine for recording such tunes as certain shops and other organisations choose to sell. The wireless is better; but even that is marked by the modern mark of all three; the impotence of the receptive party. The amateur cannot challenge the actor; the householder will find it vain to go and shout into the gramophone; the mob cannot pelt the modern speaker, especially when he is a loud-speaker. It is all a central mechanism giving out to men exactly what their masters think they should have.

“Now a child is the very sign and sacrament of personal freedom. He is a fresh free will added to the wills of the world; he is something that his parents have freely chosen to produce and which they freely agree to protect. They can feel that any amusement he gives (which is often considerable) really comes from him and from them and from nobody else. He has been born without the intervention of any master or lord. He is a creation and a contribution; he is their own creative contribution to creation. He is also a much more beautiful, wonderful, amusing and astonishing thing than any of the stale stories or jingling jazz tunes turned out by the machines. When men no longer feel that he is so, they have lost the appreciation of primary things, and therefore all sense of proportion about the world. People who prefer the mechanical pleasures, to such a miracle, are jaded and enslaved. They are preferring the very dregs of life to the first fountains of life. They are preferring the last, crooked, indirect, borrowed, repeated and exhausted things of our dying Capitalist civilisation, to the reality which is the only rejuvenation of all civilisation. It is they who are hugging the chains of their old slavery; it is the child who is ready for the new world.” [The Well and The Shallows]

If I were Fuehrer, I would prefer a higher life for whites and blacks. Higher simply means stricter. Birth control is not necessary in a totalitarian society, whose task is to make life stricter, harder, for a people. Yes, I know the Bolsheviks were, with Sweden, the first to legalize abortion; but given its ongoing popularity in Russia, I believe it has more to do with endemic pressures (food scarcity, inclement weather, crowding) than it had to do with Communism. Birth control is a symptom of the open society where technology is free to invade every aspect of our lives, right into the very seat of its conception. There is no better way to revolt against the modern world, if that’s your conceit, than by opposing this palsied, mechanized view of life.

Just as Orwell believed no man is inherently worthy enough to be carted around town in a rickshaw by another man, I believe no woman is so inherently worthless that she should make an executioner’s slab of her womb. Other means can be found to keep these people in line, their numbers down. It’s a trade of one brutality for another, though.

Gawd Chesterton is such a vile sophist. His real agenda, of course, is the Catholic “every sperm is sacred” doctrine. Which he tricks out with technophobia and the most trivializing possible parody of human motives. It is very easy to criticize liberal policies, of course, because liberalism (freedom of choice) is pretty much a bad reason for everything. But the best arguments for birth control, family planning, abortion, etc. are not liberal at all: they are eugenic.

Birth control and abortion + liberalism are generally dysgenic, since only responsible and far-sighted people limit their reproduction, whereas stupid and irresponsible people let ‘er rip. (The great counter-example, namely higher black abortion rates, have already been discussed.) But birth control and abortion + eugenics would be a boon to the race. In a WN society, I would make birth control widespread, indeed free of charge. I would institute incentives for genetically superior people to breed early and often and genetically problematic people to breed little or none.

I would limit abortion considerably. There would be no such thing as abortion on demand because a new baby will interfere with a planned ski trip (yes, I actually heard of such a case). No woman would ever need consider abortion for fear of being unable to provide for a child, because the state would welcome all healthy children. But abortion should be available and indeed encouraged in cases where the child will be born retarded, deformed, or diseased. The cost of such children is not just monetary. If a couple have a severely afflicted child first, it usually prevents them from welcoming healthy children into the world later because they are too burdened by the afflicted child and often too frightened or revolted to try again.

I can’t disagree: he is a sophist. In the same essay, or maybe another, I don’t have the tab open, he glibly dismisses Malthus because “nothing human proceeds geometrically”. Meanwhile, Fritz Haber was inventing synthetic nitrogen …

In the end, I just can’t agree. I’d keep every deformed, retarded, drooling, fumbling piece of work to come out of the old flesh canal. I wouldn’t put them on staff at Dunkin Donuts or anything, but I’d make them comfortable and give them purpose somehow. If you would agree to spare their kind, I would agree to keep them company — fix their meals, play catch and so on. That way another congenital half-retard could find useful employ away from your high-and-mighty eugenic society and its too-good-for-white-fellahin memsahibs. Deal, babu?

Sperm of course is not sacred. The only thing sacred to any of us should be our kind. By our kind, I mean mine exclusively, and yours exclusively, for that is the mechanism of race. Being that neither of us, personally, is a progenitor, we’re free to come up with ideas of how affairs ought to stand that would strike everyone else as unpleasant at best, lunatic at worst.

Anyhow: Retards and the deformed are not a problem. I mean it is a total non-problem, to use the awkward speech of scriveners. I see no pressing need to come down on them, they’re not growing “geometrically” like, say, the tweakers I see here in rural Maine, or the Somalis down in Lewiston. I think your stance comes from your geography, to be frank. That’s fine. I’m not criticizing you. The curse of individualism is that we all have gradations of opinion that are irreconcilable … and totally irrelevant to the real state of affairs.

He mentions those in support of Hitler who after the war were put in mental institutions. One of whom wrote a book about the Jewish problem. I think that implies he is making the connections and holding the left now as collaborators in their own demise.

Hmmm and to think that I thought he was crazy! This man followed his daemon alone through the wilderness of becoming (no well beaten paths for he), and in diabolical actions released his fury on the liberal weltanschauung he scorned. The performance should end with Breivik being sentence to rot in captivity – “humainly” — like a condemned caged animal that had attacked his handlers, supplemented with the latest psycho-medical drugs to “make him right, in the head.” Soon afterwards, (before the “treatment”) Breivik turns the table around on his smog handlers, becomes master of his fate and sheds his mortal coil, in a final act which is all together NOT of the Last Man.

I thank You for publishing the article and linking to our website. I testified in the court in the breivik-case june 5. and was denied to hold my prepared speech and got my time reduced from 45 minutes to 21.

Norway is a consencus-dictatorship and function as a lackey-state for the angloamerican Zionist-Empire. It is a disgrace.

The smartest thing that could be done is to give us autonomy, autonomy within a specific area of ​​Norway for people who oppose mass immigration and multiculturalism. We are interested in having our own state within the state, reserved for the indigenous Norwegian people. In other words, national conservatives, orthodox Christians, and National Socialists.

That Did, in fact, come from the Territorial Imperative of the WN’st ‘Homeland Initiative’ of the early 80’s, and implemented in deed, by Robert J. Mathews and his Silent Brothers.

I was quite surprised, as were many here, that this man seems to be studious, serious, and quite nationalist in a complex and united Nationalist world-view; his lack of impetus regarding the role of Zionists, or the jewish ethnic-state, is troubling, but it must be remembered that a ‘single individual’ must, of necessity, lack certain expertise.

Apparently, all comments regarding Breivik are closed in Scandinavia due to the overwhelming support he is getting.

Every time I run into a Scandinavian at a bar (which is more often than you’d think), all they can rail on about is the immigrants…..I like to further goad them by letting them know if my country goes tits up, I have Canada, England, Australia, New Zealand….not to mention my ancestral homelands. There no Finland #2. They must be very very concerned.

My initial reaction to Breivik was one of horror for killing all those children but after reading his closing statement I think I can see where he was coming from. In his mind he was shooting the replacements for them – The Hierarchy Enslaving Me. While his action was a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater I certainly appreciate you printing his statement. Indeed, as someone said, another scoop for Counter-Currents.

Wow. I must be insane for this makes so much sense to me. I guess the New Right has a hero now. Tibet for the Tibetans and Norway for the Norwegians etc. I wonder how they will weasel out of the fact that Norwegians are the indigenous people: those dispassionate judges who are supposed to be objective. Using human rights as a defense is quite brilliant. I did not get it before. I hope those judges have to read every law book ever written. I suspect though that they will try and ignore most of it.
Thanks for this.